Closer to truth: 'Real. Weak. Redwood.'

A few weeks ago Jacqueline Debets, Economic Development Coordinator for Humboldt County, published a Business Sense column ("Time to change the story we're telling about Humboldt County's future," Times-Standard, July 28, Page D1) about a new campaign titled "Real. Strong. Redwood." It should have been titled "Real. Weak. Redwood."

It is shocking and disturbing to see that we have a director for economic development who is either sadly misinformed and/or plays freely with facts. Her column is a sad justification for spending $750,000 given by the Headwaters Fund (and they should have some hard questions put to them) on ads to sell redwood lumber for decking, etc. She claims that what she says is not a sales pitch, "The truth is on our side". Sorry, Jacqueline, but you're not even in the ballpark when it comes to truth-telling.

She says that we have witnessed the "bust" of the old-growth timber industry but fails to tell us that is because of out of control deforestation and the near-liquidation of old growth forests. She blames it on composite and plastic decking materials and goes on to tell us why redwood is so superior to them. She says that "redwood actually reduces the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere." Yes, Jacqueline, it does when it is alive and growing, but not when it's dead and decking. Once dead, it's giving off CO2.

This expensive campaign is being done for the benefit of two major timber companies, Humboldt Redwood and the California Redwood Company (which operates under the umbrella of Green Diamond). Green Diamond is, arguably, one of the most destructive companies in the county. They are denuding the land, destroying wildlife habitat and leaving endless swaths of barren landscape. Jacqueline would have us believe that "We do a beautiful job growing redwood, in forests that also support wildlife, fish and water quality." Walt Disney couldn't have created a better fantasy than that one. Tell it to the salmon, Jacqueline.

So we have our director of economic development getting a huge amount of money from the Headwaters Fund to help out two major logging companies. Isn't that kinda like bailing out the banks? And why is she doing that? To create jobs? All she had to say about that is, "we anticipate about 2,400 jobs opening up as people retire from the industry." So the jobs will be coming up when people retire, that is if the job is still a viable one when they retire. $750,000 for that?

And now let's talk about the real reason that redwood is in trouble, the reason that Debets avoids like the plague. The reason that, in fact, she covers up by saying, "The industry itself continues to make 50- and 100-year investments that will sustain the industry for the long haul." Doesn't that sound nice? Translation: the industry is cutting redwoods at between 40 and 60 years old with an occasional 100-year-old tree. The heartwood in a 40-60 or even 100-year-old redwood isn't worth spit on the whole. It doesn't hold up or last like an ancient redwood. In some outlets they dye the redwood with a pink dye so it looks like it has more heartwood. The tragic reality is that companies like Green Diamond and their acolytes are desperately trying to create new markets for redwood because the older, wiser markets don't want their junk. The bulk of redwood was sold in the west; now they need to open up new markets to a less knowledgeable set of buyers, particularly since they're cutting at an awesome rate. The ads that our Headwaters Fund is paying for are going cross country.

Why do we have a very well-paid director of economic development who is touting for big business and who, as I started out with, is either sadly misinformed and/or plays freely with facts? Isn't it time that those who put her in office start looking at what she is doing and for whom? Her column is a disgraceful mess of misinformation and glossy nonsense.

Is it not also past time that our Board of Supervisors start taking a close look at who is running the show at the Headwaters Fund and whose interests are being served by the fund? I would certainly like to hear a fulsome explanation of how they came to grant $750,000 to support some big businesses' ads. If you agree, do let them know.